Dodd preamp vs. McCormack RLD-1 preamp

Es347, what I think you might find interesting is what tubes can do for you that you might like. The Dodd is not tubey in the classic sense, it is very neutral and balance in the bass and treble, but it does have bloom and very realistic portrayl of space and instruments within the soundstage that I can never seem to get from SS pres or amps. This sort of thing is addictive, or not, but tubes can do this in a way that SS never has to my ears. What is also nice about the Dodd is you can proabably run it for 20,000 hours without having to worry about replacing the the tubes and with a 200ohm output impedance, which is very low for a tube preamp, you can drive almost any amp, including the McCormack. I don't know if you will prefer it to the SS you are accustomed to, but it will be different, and IMHO a more musical rendering - but I don't and can't settle the SS/tube argument...

Es347, keep in mind this is strictly my opinion based on what I was hearing with my room acoustics & associated gear/speakers at the time. In fact my LS3 and RLD-1 was used with a McCormack DNA-1 amp Rev. B but I also was refering to the Platinum RLD-1 and not the stock unit for a comparison.

The Dodd looks very interesting and although I have not heard one, I am very curious about its performance/design. Based on the enthusiastic responses above & what I have read, it could be the Dodd may better both the RLD-1 & LS3 and is worth looking into.

I think soundstage depth is comparable, but the Dodd seems a bit wider. What is more noticeable to my is the slightly better dynamics of the active - but this is hair splitting -the BENT in the right system works very well in most audio regards. I think the move from passive resistor to tvc/avc is much bigger that the difference between the BENT and the Dodd. I suspect tube rolling will also take the Dodd in different directions.

Hi Nanotweeter

Here are some links to the shoot-out (pics and comments)

Pictures from the "Rave"

comparison/first impressions

It is not much but better then nothing. :)

It's not easy to recommend one over the other.
Price difference, features , sex appeal, sound characteristics and your preferences will mostly dictate the decision making.

Sound-stage among the other attributes like beautiful rendition of music performed by Isabella, air, balance and articulation were the reasons for me to rethink my priorities and decide to go with RWA.
Dodd is still in my system and while I hate to let it go, just like Pubul57 - can't keep them both. Listening to Dodd in the last few days were just as enjoyable as when I first hook it up to my system. In my opinion, it is a hell of a bargain for what it does and it is an easy recommendation since sonically, it's very transparent and somewhat neutral. Isabella on the other hand does image better then Dodd and soundstage is also painted with more masterful brush. Width and depth is wider, deeper and instruments as well as vocal(s) are in the correct scale/size , placement with believable presence. Subtle details, ambiance/ambient and inner character of the performers are simply stunning with Isabella (with DAC).

There is a price to pay to get that last refinements and it might be just to much for some. But Dodd will get you there a lot closer then any other preamp that I have heard.....in that price range (but not only).

Regards
Mariusz

Mrjstark,

Thanks for providing your take on the RWA Isabella versus the Dodd. I added the RWA 30.2 integrated to my system back in May and have been very pleased with it. I have been contemplating adding the Dodd or RWA preamp also and am most interested in how these two compare in depth of sound stage. Could you please comment?

Pubul57,

I tried running my 30.2 directly from my CDP, but found the soundstage a bit flat. Putting my PLC Sonic Euphoria (autoformers) in line increased the depth. It also, to my ears, significantly improved impact and added some welcome texture (i.e. "weight") to the sound (better impedance matching due to the transformers??). How does the soundstage depth of the Dodd compare to the Tapp?

Thanks

Phd said: "I don't blame you for wanting to sell the Audio Research LS3. This is the only preamp from Audio Research I never could warm up to. If your looking to stay with a ss pre, the McCormack Platinum RLD-1 will literally smoke the LS3!"

The only reason I am considering selling my 16 yr. old LS3 is because I want remote volume control. I do NOT want to get rid of the sound...I love the sound of the LS3, in fact I have the RLD-1 in my system now to audition and quite the contrary, I think the LS3 smokes the RLD-1. The RLD-1 is very detailed, borderline etched with a fairly planar soundstage. Also it seems a bit bass shy. I plan to leave it connected for a few more days before I pull the plug on it though. I am really intrigued by the possibilities the RLD-1 may have with the Steve McCormack mods. That however is a $1400 roll of the dice. I have his DNA 0.5 Delux amp and I like it alot. He seems to really know how to design amplifiers and the mods for the RLD-1 involve cost-no-object parts...a more sophisticated volume control and replacement of the power supply, and several other things.

I find your comment about the LS3 being the only ARC preamp you didn't like interesting since way back in the mid 90's Stereophile put it on their recommended A list (as I recall).

Now keep in mind, I am an old fart and no doubt have tin ears so take all this with a grain of salt.

Mrjstark. The BENT is gone, and I will miss it -- the best passive I have heard after trying 4 or five of them, but I don't like equipment on the sidelines. A very recommended piece for the "right" system.

I love the Dodd for sound, but the looks don't hurt. Your right about the JJ - no problem as far as I can tell, but tube rolling is one of the "pleasures" of tube pres versus passive or SS - more fun and games.

If I prefer the Dodd to some degree over the BENT and other passives, it is proabably due to the BAM (bass augmentation module) used by my Merlin speakers that goes between source and pre - and according to Bobby (Mr. Merlin) the BAM sound best with a tube buffer and with the Dodd 200ohm out put (yeah!)it bufferes very well indeed and can proabably drive any cable/amp load. I'll comment again when I get the Amperexes, though those JJs are not bad at all.

I don't blame you for wanting to sell the Audio Research LS3. This is the only preamp from Audio Research I never could warm up to. If your looking to stay with a ss pre, the McCormack Platinum RLD-1 will literally smoke the LS3!

Well, if this thing is going to get better with break-in, I'm all for it, I love it out of the box, and that with the JJs which most folks don't seem to LOVE - they sound might fine to me, but I am eager for the Amperex to arrive, I'm getting some 58-60 D-Getters which are suppose to be the "sweetest" of the Amperexes. This pre is DYNAMIC.

After the first 50h mark, you should hear a graduate but noticeable relaxing in the upper frequencies and more define bass. 100h in, you will never look back. I am sure that you will spend a lot of time with Dodd now that you started to enjoying it,......but hopefully it's not only the passive admiration of the wood work but play time as well.:)

As to JJ tubes......to be absolutely honest, I was also pleasantly surprise with their sound and for new stock......not a bad tube.....not at all.
What makes it fun ( I mean the tube rolling) is that you can tailor the sound to your taste or music that you feel will benefit from certain sound characteristics that these countless family of 6922/7308 tubes posses.

Well, if this thing is going to get better with break-in, I'm all for it, I love it out of the box, and that with the JJs which most folks don't seem to LOVE - they sound might fine to me, but I am eager for the Amperex to arrive, I'm getting some 58-60 D-Getters which are suppose to be the "sweetest" of the Amperexes. This pre is DYNAMIC.

I'm selling the BENT. Not becuase the Dodd is "better", the BENT is one heck of a fine sounding piece. But, I've falling in love with the looks of the wood paneling on the Dodd. There is definitely something to this "off the grid" thing; and now with the Dodd and RWA you can be off the grid and active.

It takes some time for those Sonicaps to burn in but you should hear its full potentials in around 50-100h mark.
My impressions with Dodd are somewhat similiar to yours.
Of coarse it is paired with different components, speakers and in totaly different room but your findings are very similar to my own. Either way, keeper or not - it is a very nice preamp I could see myself living with it in my rig for a very long time. As to your taste/preferances, RWA Isabella might or might not be for you. Isabella is more settle, balanced and enggaging but it is not as lively like Dodd is.
I mean it is real as hell but it doesn't has Dodd's forwardness if you will. Then again, we used sweet sounding Mullards. I am sure that stock JJ or more natural Amperex PQs could be more to your taste.

Well, of course I could not wait for the Amperexs to arrive. The Dodd is really wonderful. It seems to have the dynamics of the CAT SL1 which was the best I've had in terms of dynamic contrast. It seems to have the quietness of a passive, which may account for the great dynamic contrasts. While passive quiet, it does have tube bloom (distortion?) which tube users love, but certainly not slow and colored - very neutral, not disimilar to the BENT TAP or the Atma-sphere in that sense. I'm not sure I would like it much "warmer", it seems right to me. Bass seems ample, well defined, and it breathes. My speakers have no output below 28hz, so what deep bass weakness the pre may have, I don't hear it. I go back and forth between the Dodd and the BENT TAP, and really it is a tossup though they sound a bit different - both excellent preamps. You could certainly live with the Dodd for a long time and if you let yourself, not be thinking about the next upgrade. I'll have to decide whether to keeps this or the BENT as I feel a bit silly having two preamps for my Music Reference amp - the Dodd really is beautiful to look at though....

Pubule57
Dodd is the perfect tool for tube evaluation. And yes - there is very little coloration and tubes are the main characteristics - sonic wise , if one wanted to describe Dodd's sound.

Hi Glory. I'll just make the general comment that for me, tube preference (or evaluation) is completely (almost) dictated by the circuit it is used in and the system context, as performance is strongly related to those factors. In other words, I'm rarely comfortable with a statment like tube x sounds like this, and tube y sounds like that as a general proposition, it is very system dependent. In some systems for example, I need, prefer Siemens 5814s, in others RCA 12au7s -- which is better? Depends. As far as the Dodd, Amperex seems to be preferred by Gary and a few others - which of course doesn't mean I would not like the Siemens, but I suspect that the Siemens might be too much of a good thing (they tend towards speed, transparency, clarity) with the Dodd. I think of tubes as spices, different soups, different spices.

What I do think, not having yet heard it, is that the off-the grid, and simple circuit of the Dodd will let you hear differences between various tubes more easily -- the circuit gets out of the way. We'll see....

You will see mine next week. I did not think that it would ever happend......but......
Upgrading to almost twice as expensive RWA Isabella preamp with build in dac. Both very similar in design and performance.

Pub,

Do keep us updated on your findings with the Dodd vs. the other pre amps you have/had.

The GP EARLY '60's Siemens CCa crushed the Amperex WL GP PQ D getter in my system.

I have only seen one Dodd pre up on the 'Gon and it sold in two days. Good luck finding one used.

By a used one and resell for what you paid, more or less. I know Spencer has has many good preamps and he can comment on the relative merits of the Dodd versus them. My Dodd arrived today and I will be comparing to my BENT and Atma-sphere, and comaprisons with CAT, Joule, ARC and Lamm pres I've owned recently. I suspect the DOdd is killer with some tube rolling; I'll be using Amperex.

Pardon my faux pas regarding both being SS. The Dodd is indeed tubed. I'm not much of a tube junky but would still love to hear one. Dodd doesn't offer a 30 day trial so it's a bit of a gamble with $3K. Thanks for replying gentlemen.

You might want to read the Dodd review on 10audio.com. It is pretty accurate IMO.
One interesting point is that the 6922s are dual triodes, and the Dodd only uses one side of each tube, so you can swap them after normal tube life and double life of each tube. If you use expensive NOS tubes, this savings might be significant. Cheers,
Spencer

Dodd is not a SS but tube (6922 X 2). McC, sounds warmish then most SS designs but locks transparency. Dodd excells in speed, articulation and inner detail. As well as black backgrounds due to very low floor noise which is the result of going "Off THE GRID".
Again, I am not familiar with modded version of McC.

I am upgrading to Red Wine Audio Isabella preamp with build in DAC. That preamp might not be in your price range as it sells for 4K linestage and $5500 with Isabellina NOS non upsampling DAC.

In comparison to RWA, Dodd will give you 90-95% of Isabella's performance at 60-70% of its asking price.
Isabellina DAC is a completly different story and one of the reason for me to jump on RWA wagon. One of the best CD reproductions I have heard recently and the best in my system.

Cheers

Thanks to you who replied. I will choose wisely as I tend to do with just about everything I purchase. The two preamps actually do have a few things in common: SS, remote control, both in the $3K price range (the RLD-1 with mods). I like the sound of my ARC LS3 a lot but would like remote volume control. ARC used to retrofit the LS3 with remote volume but unfortunately no longer. So I am looking to buy something. I have auditioned several tube preamps in that price range but so far haven't heard anything that rivals my LS3. So....the Dodd and the McCormack have ended up in the same sentence on my short list. Any input regarding relative sound of the two would be much appreciated.

Is the RLD1 passive?

Buy low and try it out and sell if it is not to your liking.

What qualities are you looking for???
And maybe some info on the rest of your gear, speakers.....room. Do not get me wrong but these two should not be found in the same sentence. There is little that these preamps have in common (keep in mind that I am not familiar with the modded version). It is all about the synergy......choose wisely.